• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White House Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lets go over some basic math you seem to be lacking. Okay, we know that the top 1% are the richest blah blah blah. Alright, under the conservative philosophy, everyone, if they make the right decisions, can become a millionaire. How is that true? It isn't, 1% can't be expanded, it will always be the 1% unless we redistribute the wealth.

So 1% cannot expand? We have 140 million working Americans today with a workforce of 154 million. Are you telling me tha 1% of 140 million is the same as 1% of 154 million? The 1% won't change but the actual number making up that one percent can and does change. Think Zuckerman was on that list a few years ago? A lot more self made millionaires created each year and there is plenty of room for you if you have the right attitude and get away from that negative entitlement mentality.
 
So 1% cannot expand? We have 140 million working Americans today with a workforce of 154 million. Are you telling me tha 1% of 140 million is the same as 1% of 154 million? The 1% won't change but the actual number making up that one percent can and does change. Think Zuckerman was on that list a few years ago? A lot more self made millionaires created each year and there is plenty of room for you if you have the right attitude and get away from that negative entitlement mentality.

But there isn't room for everybody who tries. Just 1%. You're trying the ever growing pie argument again.
 
So 1% cannot expand?

How is 1% going to expand? Yes, it can gain a few more people, but it will still be 1%. That would only be true though if we gained population. It still means 99% of the people in the US aren't in the 1%, and I wonder how many of those think they have a shot of being in the 1% because of people like you.
 
But there isn't room for everybody who tries. Just 1%. You're trying the ever growing pie argument again.

From what I can see you will never have to worry about getting into that top 1%. There is plenty of room at the top for anyone willing to take the risk, work hard, have the dedication to do what is required to get their. Zuckerman developed a new concept and is now a billionaire. Steve Jobs invented a computer in his garage. Bill Gates dropped out of college and created Microsoft. All it takes is initiative, drive, and hard work. Most here have that entitlement mentality and want it handed to them. I didn't grow up that way and worked hard for what I have. I resent you or anyone else telling me how to spend what I have earned. What entitles you to the spoils of my labor?
 
How is 1% going to expand? Yes, it can gain a few more people, but it will still be 1%. That would only be true though if we gained population. It still means 99% of the people in the US aren't in the 1%, and I wonder how many of those think they have a shot of being in the 1% because of people like you.

1% of 140 million is 1.4 million people. 1% of 154 million is 1.54 million people or 140,000 more and that is today. As the population grows so does the 1%. Further you don't have to be in the 1% to be quite wealthy in all areas not just financial. I 35 years in the business world and did quite well. No one gave me anything other than the opportunity which I took advantage of. How am I preventing you from being in that top 1%? It is that kind of attitude that will assure you of reliance on the entitlement program for ever.
 
How am I preventing you from being in that top 1%?

By you merely being in the top 1% lessens my odds of being in the top 1%.

What entitles you to the spoils of my labor?

Nothing, what entitles you not to pay enough taxes?
 
But there isn't room for everybody who tries. Just 1%. You're trying the ever growing pie argument again.

You might be interested in this article from the economist:.

AMERICANS are an optimistic lot. If there is one thing they believe in above all, it is the ability to move ahead. In poll after poll, a majority reject the notion that success is determined by forces beyond their control. In early 2009, hardly a sunny period, 71% still agreed that hard work and personal skill are the main ingredients for success. A high degree of social mobility has always defined American culture, from the work of Alexis de Tocqueville and Horatio Alger to the remarkable story of Barack Obama himself.

But the reality for most Americans is becoming more complicated. The recession came at the end of a period marked by record levels of inequality. Many Americans, lacking true upward mobility, bought its trappings, such as a bigger house or better car. Disaster duly followed. As a result, American optimism has been pierced by doubt. In a new poll for The Economist by YouGov, 36% of respondents said they had less opportunity than their parents did, compared with 39% who thought they had more. Half thought the next generation would have a lower standard of living, double the share that thought living standards would rise. As the country recovers, two problems cloud its future. Rates of social mobility are unlikely to grow. Inequality, however, may widen even further.

These trends have been building up for years. In 1963 John Kennedy declared that a rising tide lifts all boats. Indeed, in 1963 this was true. Between 1947 and 1973, the typical American family’s income roughly doubled in real terms. Between 1973 and 2007, however, it grew by only 22%—and this thanks to the rise of two-worker households. In 2004 men in their 30s earned 12% less in real terms than their fathers did at a similar age, according to Pew’s Economic Mobility Project. This has been blamed on everything from immigration to trade to declining rates of unionisation. But the driving factor, most economists agree, has been technological change and the consequent lowering of demand for middle-skilled workers.

The most highly skilled, meanwhile, have stuffed their pockets happily. Between 1970 and 2008 the Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, grew from 0.39 to 0.47. In mid-2008 the typical family’s income was lower than it had been in 2000. The richest 10% earned nearly half of all income, surpassing even their share in 1928, the year before the Great Crash.
 
Last edited:
By you merely being in the top 1% lessens my odds of being in the top 1%.



Nothing, what entitles you not to pay enough taxes?

Are you paying attention to what you are saying? How do you know how much I pay in taxes, how much I give to charity, how much I donate to the Church? You don't believe this is a problem in someone else claiming they know what someone else's fair share is? Is this the way you were raised and why are you then wasting your time in school if there is no opportunity for you in the future and this is your attitude towards individual wealth creation?
 
Is this the way you were raised and why are you then wasting your time in school if there is no opportunity for you in the future and this is your attitude towards individual wealth creation?

Yes, I am proud to say this is the way I was raised, minuse one thing. If I did become rich I would find it to be my civil duty to give back to those who helped me along the way and gave me such a great place to live. IE, I would want the US to tax me and everyone else at my income level at 90% progressive taxation. I would not donate my money though if such tax did not exist because me donating 100 million dollars is a piss in a pond of 14.5 trillion dollars and rising.

How do you know how much I pay in taxes, how much I give to charity, how much I donate to the Church?

How much you give to charity and to the church is your own business. Although I think it is a waste of time giving money to the church, but that is another discussion.

You don't believe this is a problem in someone else claiming they know what someone else's fair share is?

Yeah, obviously someone is mis-claiming that the top 1% are or are not paying their fair share.

Also, you gloated earlier in this thread about your income. Unless I misinterpreted that then feel free to correct me.
 
1% of 140 million is 1.4 million people. 1% of 154 million is 1.54 million people or 140,000 more and that is today. As the population grows so does the 1%. Further you don't have to be in the 1% to be quite wealthy in all areas not just financial. I 35 years in the business world and did quite well. No one gave me anything other than the opportunity which I took advantage of. How am I preventing you from being in that top 1%? It is that kind of attitude that will assure you of reliance on the entitlement program for ever.

All the graphs on income disparity clearly demonstrate that about 19%, have also benefitted from service to the 1%.

The overseer class.

This is what has produced the huge numbers of newly rich in southeast asia.

It appears these numbers are pretty constant globally and historically.

1-2% have most of the wealth, the next 18-19% share in this wealth in exchange for "managing" the lower 80%.

Prior to the mid 70s America was NOT following this pattern.

Since then we have been returning to the good old status quo.
 
I always get a chuckle when those who tend to have failed personal economics 101 lecture those who got an A in that subject.

Turtle, how do you define "those who got an A in that subject".... personal economics 101 that is? We have many who did get an A in the subject courtesy of Mumsy and Daddykins passing onto them the brilliance of their decisions and hard work to be born into that family. I guess we would call that a "legacy A"?
 
You might be interested in this article from the economist:.

Thanks.

As I've said before, my technical knowledge of economics is low. But my pattern recognition abilities keep yelling that something isn't right.

SOMETHING of moment occurred in the mid 70s. This period of time marks a significant shift in the economic trajectory of the people of this country.

Pretty much every graph and chart I see demonstrates that something major changed.
 
Jryan;1059851638]Yes, I am proud to say this is the way I was raised, minuse one thing. If I did become rich I would find it to be my civil duty to give back to those who helped me along the way and gave me such a great place to live. IE, I would want the US to tax me and everyone else at my income level at 90% progressive taxation. I would not donate my money though if such tax did not exist because me donating 100 million dollars is a piss in a pond of 14.5 trillion dollars and rising.

Great, wouldn't that be a wonderful choice for you to make instead of having the govt. redistribute your money to someone else? I look at that as my civic duty as well which is why I give so much to charity and the church. That way it is my choice where my money goes just like it would be your choice to spend your money.

You were doing so great and then you say you support the govt. taxing you at 90%. Doesn't that take away your civic duty and delegate it to the Govt? Think they can be more effect in solving local problems than you can by directing it how you see fit? You don't seem to understand the concept of personal responsibility thus the ability to direct your money wherever you want vs. the govt. directing it for you.


How much you give to charity and to the church is your own business. Although I think it is a waste of time giving money to the church, but that is another discussion.

You see, that is where you and I disagree. I believe it is my choice where to spend my money. Where do you think the govt. spends yours? At least I know where my money is going when I donate it, do you?


Yeah, obviously someone is mis-claiming that the top 1% are or are not paying their fair share.

Also, you gloated earlier in this thread about your income. Unless I misinterpreted that then feel free to correct me.

Wasn't gloating at all just stating fact, logic, and common sense. It is easy claiming businesses and rich aren't paying enough. I put a name on that rich person which makes it tougher for you to argue. There isn't a lot of logic in the liberal argument, only feelings. You feel the govt. has your best interest at heart and those truly in need when the reality is the govt. has their own best interest at heart. you have no idea where your money is going when sent to the govt. but you do know where it is going when you spend it.
 
As you have been asked to you believe Zuckerman was on that original list of wealthiest people? That indicates that the pie is always growing. What are you doing to get your piece of the pie? I see a lot of people here whining but I assure you that will never get more of the pie whining. Those that have much of the pie today only get more of the growing pie if you allow it and don't compete.

The pie is growing unfortunately the number of people taking slices of the pie has increased much faster, that means smaller pieces for everyone except for a few who control the distribution of the pie, I know/expect you under stand this but just in case lets say that in America we have 320 million people drawing from the pie and then we bring in 1.3 billion Indians and another 1.2 billion Chinese. Now lets say that the pie represents jobs and their are 1.2 billion jobs and 3 billion job seekers that means that 1.8 billion do not have a slice of the pie and it will not matter what that 1.8 million do even if they re-educate their selves and displace some of those working those workers that they replaced now take their place as unemployed or underemployed.


I question myself as to whether a global economy "pie" is a good or bad thing, short term it has hurt the american worker maybe long term "10-20 years" it would be good. I wonder if it is/was preventable but their is no way that anyone can deny the impact it has had on America's working middle class. Now those who have benefitted the most from the Chinese and Indian merging into the job pie are those who hand out the slices you know those that can invest in foreign markets. It seems that for some reason the Republicans and Wall Streeter's fight any effort to make the Chinese live up to the trade agreements and to bring their undervalued currency up

Senate moves toward final vote on China currency

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he wants a vote on legislation that could punish China for undervaluing its currency.

The bill is intended to impose enough trade penalties against China so Beijing will keep the yuan below market values.
The measure cleared an important procedural vote Thursday, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he wanted a vote on passage either late Thursday or Friday.

STORY: House leader against punishing China on currency

The White House has raised concerns about taking unilateral action against the Chinese. Multinational corporations that do business in China widely oppose the plan, fearing it could lead to a trade war.

But the legislation has bipartisan backing from senators responding to popular resentment to the way China has come to dominate U.S. markets and drive American manufacturers out of business.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican, cited estimates that China has cost the U.S. some 2 million manufacturing jobs in the past decade, and that the 30% advantage Chinese producers have because of the undervalued currency could prove devastating as China prepares to enter world markets in commercial aircraft and automobiles.

Economists agree that the yuan is undervalued by 25% to 30% against the dollar; some put it as high as 40%. The result is that Chinese goods are increasingly cheaper in the United States and U.S. products more expensive in China.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said in a statement this week that the bill violated World Trade Organization rules "and seriously disturbed China-U.S. trade and economic relations."

Because of the support the Chinese receive from many republicans and Wall Streeters, The American worker can not compete against the low wages paid to foreign workers the Wall Streeter's and the many republicans supporting the Chinese
 
All the graphs on income disparity clearly demonstrate that about 19%, have also benefitted from service to the 1%.

The overseer class.

This is what has produced the huge numbers of newly rich in southeast asia.

It appears these numbers are pretty constant globally and historically.

1-2% have most of the wealth, the next 18-19% share in this wealth in exchange for "managing" the lower 80%.

Prior to the mid 70s America was NOT following this pattern.

Since then we have been returning to the good old status quo.

How many social problems have been solved by the 14.6 TRILLION debt the govt. has generated? You think that govt. compassion is about how much money can be spent or actual results generated? Actual results generated means no longer needing govt. services.

I don't care who controls most of the wealth, why do you? You don't seem to know or care what they do with their money and that is sad. You stereotype every rich person by the ILLEGAL actions of a few and that doesn't give you a lot of credibility. Until you know how much the rich give to charities your speculation is just that, speculation.
 
Turtle, how do you define "those who got an A in that subject".... personal economics 101 that is? We have many who did get an A in the subject courtesy of Mumsy and Daddykins passing onto them the brilliance of their decisions and hard work to be born into that family. I guess we would call that a "legacy A"?

It seems to me that the greatness of America is that people on the lower rung of the economic ladder found ways to climb that ladder, rather than live in a caste system where people were constrained by their birth.

If the proposals from your side is that we no longer want people to aspire and find ways to move up the ladder, rather the way to achieve is to pull others down then that should be of great concern. This mindset of what we can't do and need to pull others down will not get us out of the problems we face in my view.
 
The pie is growing unfortunately the number of people taking slices of the pie has increased much faster, that means smaller pieces for everyone except for a few who control the distribution of the pie, I know/expect you under stand this but just in case lets say that in America we have 320 million people drawing from the pie and then we bring in 1.3 billion Indians and another 1.2 billion Chinese. Now lets say that the pie represents jobs and their are 1.2 billion jobs and 3 billion job seekers that means that 1.8 billion do not have a slice of the pie and it will not matter what that 1.8 million do even if they re-educate their selves and displace some of those working those workers that they replaced now take their place as unemployed or underemployed.


I question myself as to whether a global economy "pie" is a good or bad thing, short term it has hurt the american worker maybe long term "10-20 years" it would be good. I wonder if it is/was preventable but their is no way that anyone can deny the impact it has had on America's working middle class. Now those who have benefitted the most from the Chinese and Indian merging into the job pie are those who hand out the slices you know those that can invest in foreign markets. It seems that for some reason the Republicans and Wall Streeter's fight any effort to make the Chinese live up to the trade agreements and to bring their undervalued currency up

Senate moves toward final vote on China currency

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he wants a vote on legislation that could punish China for undervaluing its currency.

The bill is intended to impose enough trade penalties against China so Beijing will keep the yuan below market values.
The measure cleared an important procedural vote Thursday, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he wanted a vote on passage either late Thursday or Friday.

STORY: House leader against punishing China on currency

The White House has raised concerns about taking unilateral action against the Chinese. Multinational corporations that do business in China widely oppose the plan, fearing it could lead to a trade war.

But the legislation has bipartisan backing from senators responding to popular resentment to the way China has come to dominate U.S. markets and drive American manufacturers out of business.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican, cited estimates that China has cost the U.S. some 2 million manufacturing jobs in the past decade, and that the 30% advantage Chinese producers have because of the undervalued currency could prove devastating as China prepares to enter world markets in commercial aircraft and automobiles.

Economists agree that the yuan is undervalued by 25% to 30% against the dollar; some put it as high as 40%. The result is that Chinese goods are increasingly cheaper in the United States and U.S. products more expensive in China.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said in a statement this week that the bill violated World Trade Organization rules "and seriously disturbed China-U.S. trade and economic relations."

Because of the support the Chinese receive from many republicans and Wall Streeters, The American worker can not compete against the low wages paid to foreign workers the Wall Streeter's and the many republicans supporting the Chinese

Still waiting for your answer as to how my earning income and getting wealthy hurt you or your family? What is my fair share in the form of State, Local, and Federal Taxes? Your focus is misguided as you ignore the liberal greed to focus on what individuals make on their own.
 
=Conservative;1059851694]Still waiting for your answer as to how my earning income and getting wealthy hurt you or your family? What is my fair share in the form of State, Local, and Federal Taxes? Your focus is misguided as you ignore the liberal greed to focus on what individuals make on their own.

First off I do not care what you make, you can't seem to under stand I am fine my family is fine we all worked and worked hard to make a living, my concern is for those less fortunate then I am, why because we are all part of the whole, not one of us could stand on our own. Maybe the difference is in where we came from the experiences we had that shaped our lives and opinions,

If you did not participate in the scams that Wall Street perpetrated on Americans stealing from the middle class, poor and elderly by speculating on life essential needs, by engaging in our profiting from predatory lending practices ect. In other words if you worked for a living I could care less about what you have
 
First off I do not care what you make, you can't seem to under stand I am fine my family is fine we all worked and worked hard to make a living, my concern is for those less fortunate then I am, why because we are all part of the whole, not one of us could stand on our own. Maybe the difference is in where we came from the experiences we had that shaped our lives and opinions,

If you did not participate in the scams that Wall Street perpetrated on Americans stealing from the middle class, poor and elderly by speculating on life essential needs, by engaging in our profiting from predatory lending practices ect. In other words if you worked for a living I could care less about what you have

there are a very small percentage of those people you are describing but that doesn't stop you from stereotyping anyone that has more than you.
 
It seems to me that the greatness of America is that people on the lower rung of the economic ladder found ways to climb that ladder, rather than live in a caste system where people were constrained by their birth.

If the proposals from your side is that we no longer want people to aspire and find ways to move up the ladder, rather the way to achieve is to pull others down then that should be of great concern. This mindset of what we can't do and need to pull others down will not get us out of the problems we face in my view.

Not at all. I want people to be successful - wildly successful. If a person through their own talent and hard work makes it big - bully for them and I raise my glass in a toast to them.

My comments were geared to a very narrow slice - the silly claim that the rich got an A in personal economics (as one poster identified it) while in reality many who complain the loudest about the rich getting picked on are only rich because they had the dumb luck to be born into a family of means and inherit it.

They did not earn an A in personal economics - they were given an A along with diapers, formual and a nice stroller.
 
there are a very small percentage of those people you are describing but that doesn't stop you from stereotyping anyone that has more than you.

and it surely doesn't stop you from stereotyping those who have less than you :).
 
and it surely doesn't stop you from stereotyping those who have less than you :).

You haven't been paying attention then. I don't care what someone else makes or pays in taxes, why do you? If you want to pay 90% in taxes, do it, but why force everyone else to do the same thing? The stereotyping comes from people who seem to know what those rich people do with their money or what they spend it on? What does your high tax rates do to state and local tax revenue? think about it
 
If you want to pay 90% in taxes, do it, but why force everyone else to do the same thing?

Because one person paying 90% taxes does nothing.
 
Jryan;1059851836]Because one person paying 90% taxes does nothing.

You are showing your youth and making a mockery of the discussion. How does sending 90's of your income into the govt. so they can spend it on what they deem necessary actually benefit anyone and do you even know where the money goes? do you even care or are you like all liberals where spending in the name of compassion means more than actual compassionate spending that generates results?
 
Last edited:
there are a very small percentage of those people you are describing but that doesn't stop you from stereotyping anyone that has more than you.

I know you can read so apparently you are so stuck on your talking points that you can't ?? Are you a robot?

Originally Posted by EarlzP

First off I do not care what you make, you can't seem to under stand I am fine my family is fine we all worked and worked hard to make a living, my concern is for those less fortunate then I am, why because we are all part of the whole, not one of us could stand on our own. Maybe the difference is in where we came from the experiences we had that shaped our lives and opinions,

If you did not participate in the scams that Wall Street perpetrated on Americans stealing from the middle class, poor and elderly by speculating on life essential needs, by engaging in our profiting from predatory lending practices ect. In other words if you worked for a living I could care less about what you have

What is it about I could care less about what you have that you can't under stand? Some of the rich earned "worked for" what they have and some of them stole what they have, which are you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom